Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court

High Court Dismisses Appeal Challenging Expert Committee's Opinion on Revised Answer Key

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Chandigarh, May 29, 2023: In a recent judgment, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed an appeal challenging the opinion of an expert committee regarding the revised answer key for a recruitment examination conducted by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC). The appellant, Monu, had filed the appeal after his writ petition was dismissed by the court.

The appellant had applied for the position of Clerk in response to an advertisement issued by the HSSC in 2015. After appearing in the written examination in 2016 and securing 152 marks, the appellant was called for an interview. However, due to a query raised by another candidate regarding the correctness of an answer in the model answer key, the expert committee reviewed the matter and revised the answer key. Consequently, the appellant was not appointed to the position.

The appellant obtained the revised answer key through the Right to Information Act, 2005, and challenged the correctness of the answer to the disputed question. However, his efforts with the HSSC did not yield any result, leading him to file a writ petition before the High Court.

The Single Judge, after examining the matter and considering the respondent's response, held that the court cannot question the correctness of the expert committee's opinion. The Single Judge further noted that the change in the answer applied to all candidates and that the appellant had approached the court after a significant delay. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Court, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi Shanker Jha (Chief Justice) and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Palli, upheld the decision of the Single Judge. The Division Bench referred to Supreme Court precedents that emphasized that once a matter has been examined by experts, the court is not required to question the correctness of their opinion. In this case, an expert committee had examined the correctness of the disputed answer and revised the answer key accordingly.

Considering the timeline of events, the Division Bench concluded that taking up the issue at this stage would not serve any meaningful purpose. The advertisement was issued in 2015, the examination was held in 2016, the result was published in 2017, and the revised result was declared in 2018, with selections from the select list already made.

The appeal was dismissed, and all pending applications were disposed of by the court.

Date of decision : 25.05.2023

Monu vs Haryana Staff Selection Commissio

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/25-May-2023-Monu-vs-Haryana-Staff-Selc-P^0H.pdf"]

Latest Legal News